In this era of evidence-bolstered orthodontics, the clinical orthodontist must integrate the best scientific information available with his or her clinical experience to better serve each patient’s values and needs. Nonetheless, the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) has established ideal static occlusal goals as assessed on dental casts for their phase III examination. The Board apparently operates on the premise that ideal occlusion occurs naturally, and that this occlusal arrangement is a desirable orthodontic goal for every patient. There is no evidence that such narrowly defined “ideal occlusion” is in any way a measure of oral health and quality of life. With the modern-day paradigms of esthetic enhancement and evidence-based decision-making in mind, is it a reasonable expectation that such arbitrary criteria for buccal crown inclinations, etc, constitute valid treatment goals that will achieve the best result and most esthetic outcome for all orthodontic patients?